Moderator: Cartographers
reggie_mac wrote:I like the idea of this map, its going to be epic to play on. But making it a max of 6 citys / 'tech trees'?oaktown wrote:Game type flexibility. The map should support various game types and not be designed with specific/limited game settings in mind (standard, assassin, fog of war, 2 players, etc.).
Kind of a bit outside where it needs to be going, unless there are changes afoot im not aware of. So in an 8 player game, then 2 people are automatically at a disadvantage as they have no 'tech tree'
SuicidalSnowman wrote:Well, four has got to go, I picked 7 also, but then three might need some impassables.
Four is out of place though.
OliverFA wrote:Time for an update!
My personal preferences are to remove cities numbers 3 and 4, because they are in the middle of the map, and removing them would leave the six surviving cities in the "corners" of the map.
OliverFA wrote:reggie_mac wrote:I like the idea of this map, its going to be epic to play on. But making it a max of 6 citys / 'tech trees'?oaktown wrote:Game type flexibility. The map should support various game types and not be designed with specific/limited game settings in mind (standard, assassin, fog of war, 2 players, etc.).
Kind of a bit outside where it needs to be going, unless there are changes afoot im not aware of. So in an 8 player game, then 2 people are automatically at a disadvantage as they have no 'tech tree'
Thanks for your comments reggie_mac.
Our first intention was to make the map playable for 8 players. But we have seen that due to limited space available, 8 players are too many for this concept. We are cuting down to only 6 players in order to make the map possible.
Hope that explanation helped.
qwert wrote:i can understand,when map have small number of territory to be for 6 player map,but these map who have over 100 territory,to be limited for only 6 players?! You realy dont have any good reason to these map be for only 6 players.
If i have any right i will not alove these,but again if Feudal war map have these privileges to be for 6 player,then i dont see any reason why will someon not alove that these map also be for 6 player.
For me is not normal that any map who have big number of territory,have some player limitation.
qwert wrote:Its not mine job to explane people why map with "248 territories" must be for 8 players.
Its your job to explane people why these map must be limited for 6 players, I just say what i think,and these is mine oppinion,that any map who have these number of territory can not be limited,because you dont have any valid reason to do that.
Sorry for causing any problems, now i will just step back,and move out from these topic.
qwert wrote:Its not mine job to explane people why map with "248 territories" must be for 8 players.
Its your job to explane people why these map must be limited for 6 players, I just say what i think,and these is mine oppinion,that any map who have these number of territory can not be limited,because you dont have any valid reason to do that.
Sorry for causing any problems, now i will just step back,and move out from these topic.
reggie_mac wrote:Feudal War was made when the max was 6 players, so thats that one sorted.
qwert wrote:I just say what i think,and these is mine oppinion,that any map who have these number of territory can not be limited,because you dont have any valid reason to do that.
reggie_mac wrote:Also after re-reading the whole thread, im i right in understanding that you cannot attack and take over someone else's tech tree? if this is so, how can you play an assassin game on this map?
yeti_c wrote:Personally I think you are arguing for arguings sake
which, after spending some time trying to find out i came across nothing either way so i was just trying to get an answer, which i got. No red mist, just looking for some opacity of higher than 50%I'd hate to see a whole bunch of work having to be re-done because of it.
reggie_mac wrote:but on topic, would making the tech tree vertical open up more space, it could possible allow you to stretch the map a bit so its not so cramped.
qwert wrote:Its not mine job to explane people why map with "248 territories" must be for 8 players.
Its your job to explane people why these map must be limited for 6 players, I just say what i think,and these is mine oppinion,that any map who have these number of territory can not be limited,because you dont have any valid reason to do that.
Sorry for causing any problems, now i will just step back,and move out from these topic.
yeti_c wrote:reggie_mac wrote:but on topic, would making the tech tree vertical open up more space, it could possible allow you to stretch the map a bit so its not so cramped.
I'm not sure - it may work... - that's something that Oliver and the GFX guy will have to look at.
C.
yeti_c wrote:As mentioned above - the idea of the map is that the players have to play a fine balance between research - and expansion in order to win the game - if the cities are too close to each other - then there will be no point in research... if the neutrals are too high - then their will be no point in expansion - if the Instructions are not clear - then the map won't pass gameplay... Oliver is walking a fine line - which we are attempting to help him walk - and as discussed earlier in the thread - it would be a lot easier to balance this map with 6 players than 8 - therefore the concept of the map will be able to progress further for a future 8 player map when we know more about it...
Hell - I'd even go so far as saying that this map could be cut down to just 4 cities (1 in each corner) and then we really would get the map we want - making it for 6 is a compromise - making it for 8 isn't possible.
SuicidalSnowman wrote:I also have to say that this is over my head, I do not have the experience to be useful here, as I don't generally get that involved in map balance issues on this level of depth.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users